Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Notices topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee lays over bill to remove paywalls from public notices after debate on scope and logistics
Summary
Representative Soukla introduced legislation to ensure public notices are not placed behind newspaper paywalls; witnesses including the Colorado Press Association urged caution about drafting and timing, and the Office of Respondent Parents' Counsel supported online, searchable notices for child‑welfare cases. The committee laid the bill over for further work.
Representative Soukla introduced a bill (recorded in the transcript as 'House Bill 26‑10‑95') intended to remove paywalls that block public access to legal notices, saying ‘‘There should not be a paywall in front of a public notice’’ and framing the proposal as an equity measure for people who do not buy newspapers.
Soukla said the bill’s aim is to remove the cost barrier for low-income residents while preserving local governments’ ability to publish print notices when appropriate. She emphasized the intention is not to harm newspapers and described the change as a way to expand access to legally required notices for people who cannot afford paywalled access.
Committee members raised several concerns. Representative Phillips and others asked how online publication would reach older residents and whether internet access substitutes for print; Representative Stewart and others asked whether home-rule municipalities already have notice flexibility and whether the bill’s definitions are too broad. Representative Basenecker and others suggested the bill’s language could require more precise drafting to avoid unintended consequences.
Reagan Porter, CEO of the Colorado Press Association, told the committee he supports the goal but warned the bill as drafted is broader than intended, citing a recent technical drafting effort that took months and many lawyers to reconcile. Porter said public notices already must be posted on a statewide public-notice website under current law and raised logistical concerns about mixing online and print affidavits and about having multiple places where notices appear. "I'm very concerned about the speed at which this bill is moving," he said, and urged additional time to narrow scope and address workflow issues.
Melanie Jordan of the Office of Respondent Parents' Counsel testified in support and said that for dependency and neglect cases, online searchable notice is more likely to provide actual notice to absent parents than a non-searchable print ad, citing court guidance that substitute service must reasonably give actual notice.
After discussion, the sponsor expressed openness to working with colleagues and asked for a co-prime; the chair laid the bill over for a later date for amendments and closing comments (action only) so stakeholders and legislators can refine the language and address the technical and logistical issues raised.
The committee took no final vote on the bill at this meeting.
